EDIT: *According to the woman in the informational bit at the end of the movie ( the executive director of the National Foundation to End Child Abuse and Neglect ), it is a "fictionalized account of abduction and imprisonment". Yet others are saying it's based on the true story of Elizabeth Fritzl in Austria. I had originally assumed that LMN implied it's a true story to attract more viewers, especially with the caption at the beginning - "Inspired by true events". The fact that it's based on a true story makes it absolutely beyond horrific, which is why it was important to determine whether it was or not. So I watched the 15-minute special at the end to find out, but now I'm confused.*
Secondly, another reviewer here said that Judd Nelson acted badly in it in his role as the psycho father Don. That couldn't be farther from the truth. He was so good in the role that I had to keep reminding myself he was only acting. It was too easy to believe Judd Nelson, the actor, is/was as despicable as the character he was portraying. I don't think LMN actors are ever considered for Emmy awards, but if not, they should make an exception for him. Sometimes I read reviews here on imdb and wonder what is wrong with people who can't recognize and appreciate great acting, and who rave with adulation about terrible movies with bad acting and direction, etc.
I was pleasantly surprised to see that Elizabeth Rohm directed this movie - she's a very good actress and did a great job with this.
It was difficult to sit through at times since the entire theme was so disturbing, but it was very good as a whole except for minor plot holes and contrivances, such as Chris the boyfriend waiting for her for two decades. It would've been more believable and real if he had told her he had gotten married and had a few kids during those twenty years, and either they could be good friends or he was divorced and available. But since nothing was said in that respect, the audience is led to believe he had been waiting for her all those years, even though her dad had told him that she had run off with another guy.
Side note: I wanted her to climb out of the hole she scraped bigger and go for help instead of flashing signals with the flashlight.
Also, the make-up people should have done more to make her look 38 years old at the end because she still looked like a teenager - just raggedy, thin, and pale, which was realistic, but she looked much younger than the age she would've been then.
Finally, I don't know if anyone else noticed the subtle implication of pure intentional evil in something Don said toward the end: when the boy Michael came at him to fight him and Don mocked and belittled his smallness in size and weight compared to Thomas who had been raised upstairs all his life - knowing all the while that Thomas was bigger and healthier than pale, thin Michael because Michael had grown up in the bomb shelter with no sunshine or fresh air and never enough to eat. Don shouldn't be hostile to a child that came from sex with his own daughter in the first place, of course. It magnified what a monster he was.
Grade B- / 7 out of 10.
مزید دکھائیں 
